Public hearing today on red light cameras

A public hearing will be held in Riverhead today on a resolution to temporarily suspend the Suffolk County Red Light Camera program.

Suffolk Legis. Kevin McCaffrey, R-Lindenhurst, introduced Resolution 1581 in July. The law would suspend the red light program until a thorough safety study could be conducted by the Suffolk County Department of Public Works.

Citing a recent Traffic and Parking Violations Agency study showing a 30 percent increase in rear-end collisions at red light camera intersections and an increase in accidents with injuries at almost half of the intersections, McCaffrey said it’s in county residents’ best interest to study the issue further.

“Whether they’re slamming on the brakes or speeding up, everyone’s behavior changes when there is a red light camera,” McCaffrey said. “When you approach one of these intersections, you forget everything you have learned – you might find yourself braking sooner than you normally would have.”

McCaffrey noted that at one intersection in his district – Route 109 and Great East Neck Road – the number of accidents skyrocketed from one in 2014 to 11 in 2015.

“If this program is really about safety, then it should be easy for everyone to agree to pause it, so the Department of Public Works can get to the bottom of these accident and injury increases at many of the red light camera intersections,” McCaffrey said. “Anyone voting against my resolution clearly has other motives for the program and is perhaps putting revenue ahead of the safety of our residents.”

5 comments

“Citing a recent Traffic and Parking Violations Agency study”??? There should be a study done on the TPVA itself which would reveal it’s essentially a criminal enterprise that is shaking working people down by assessing insanely large fees for minor infractions like not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign, etc. taking full advantage of the fact that people don’t want points on their licenses. Not to mention having people wait for endless hours.

If the program was 100% about safety, the fine structure would change based on the vastly different safety hazards associated with blasting through a red light that’s been red for ten seconds vs. a rolling right on red or vs. a red light run within the first half-second after the light changes (because this is before anyone else is allowed to start moving).

How can this program be about safety, if a 2 mph right turn on red is punished equally to the 60 mph red light runner after the opposite approaches are already moving?

Red light cameras CAN enhance safety. But unless the program administration changes, there will always be cause to see this as a revenue stream first.

A truly safety-minded program would impose vastly different fines for blazing at 60 mph, ten seconds into the red, vs. a 2 mph rolling right on red, or vs. a red light run just a half-second into the red (before any other approach is permitted to start moving). With equal fines for vastly different safety hazards, it’s not about safety.
And that’s a shame, because red light cameras CAN increase safety and reduce injuries. But the programs in Suffolk and Nassau have to administered differently to avoid looking like they’re revenue-generators first and foremost.